Large Scale Central

Air Wire Drop-In MU

Question:

Paul, I have a GP9 with AirWire drop-in and a 14.8 volt, 5200 mah battery. Would it be possible to mu it to another GP9, using the method you outlined for the GP9 on the OVGRS web site? In other words, use the battery powered, R/C GP9 as a battery car with an MU plug to run them both.

What modifications would I need to make to each?

Answer:

Steve, I have not done an installation using an Airwire drop-in. According to the CVP website, the AirWire decoder can provide 120 Watts of continuous power. For example, a 12 volt battery means the decoder can supply 10 Amps of motor drive. If using a 14.8 volt battery, the decoder should be able to handle 8 amps of motor drive.

USAT GP-9s have reputation of being power hogs. Most feel it is the motors, but I have found the motors are just as efficient as Aristo-Craft motors during normal running. The real draw is in the lights bulbs and voltage regulator used. Some new USAT diesels now use LEDs and dropping resistors which I have found really reduce the current draw. That is why I change the bulbs to LEDs in my GP-9 installations.

If your GP-9s have light bulbs, I would recommend changing them out to LEDs. As I am not familiar with the AirWire drop-in decoder, perhaps Greg or others may be able to provide the information on how this might be done.

Sorry I could not be of more help, but AirWire and DCC is not my field of expertise.

Thanks for giving it a shot, Paul. Airwire pretends to be DCC, but its not, as the commands are sent via radio to the decoder, not through the track.

If you’re really worried about the second GP9 taking too much power, you could possible remove a power block from that engine. In its place you could install 2 ball bearing axles from RollEz or others.

Honestly, if you keep the battery voltage at 14.4v you should be fine for lights and power on both engines…I would avoid smoke though (if nothing else it wastes runtime).

Rockwall Canyon Jeff said:

If you’re really worried about the second GP9 taking too much power, you could possible remove a power block from that engine. In its place you could install 2 ball bearing axles from RollEz or others.

Honestly, if you keep the battery voltage at 14.4v you should be fine for lights and power on both engines…I would avoid smoke though (if nothing else it wastes runtime).

Good idea. I gave up smoking a long time ago.(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-innocent.gif) (http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-surprised.gif)(http://largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)

In all seriousness, I need to change the lights on the second GP9 to LEDs, anyway. They’re available from USAT for next to nuttin’ as drop in replacement parts.

I could put a 5 amp fuse or circuit breaker in line between the two locos to protect the Airwire drop in board. Overkill?

Edited to correct autocorrect

Steve,

Im in the habit of putting a glass fuse (fast-acting, less than 10 amp) between the RX and battery. Its an added safeguard which I have personally tested!

Ive never had a fuse on the output side of the RX, but I don’t see why it would hurt. I would say, if you install a fuse on the output, place it it right near the RX (versus having it in the other engine or such).

Well, I’m eleck trick illy challenged. One of my COs was not sure I was qualified to operate a light switch. That’s why I’m axing all these questions.

Come to think of it, I dont remember a fuse being mentioned in the install of the “Drop-In.” I’ll have to check the “Destructions.”

Intuitively, it would seem that an interrupter of some sort between the two locos, whether fuse or breaker, would make sense. Why does it make a difference for it to be placed on the “mother-ship?”

Could it be one of those breaker like things Aristo used?

By the way, pulling the same load with fewer motors does not reduce the current draw significantly.

Under load, the motors will draw current based on load, and if you have a 4 motor loco, and then try to pull the SAME load (train) with 2 motors, you will find that the 2 motors will draw almost exactly the same current as 4 motors.

(some basic laws of physics and energy here)

Greg

p.s. the orange Aristo thingies are self-resetting thermal breakers, trade name PolySwitch.

Greg, I knew the polyswitches had something to do with heat. Would they be suitable for this application, or just cause problems?

So, are you saying that four motors would us the same amount of juice as two? I really have no idea, that’s why I ask. Refer to the light switch, above.

Greg, I knew the polyswitches had something to do with heat. Would they be suitable for this application, or just cause problems?

So, are you saying that four motors would us the same amount of juice as two? I really have no idea, that’s why I ask. Refer to the light switch, above.

Steve Featherkile said:

Thanks for giving it a shot, Paul. Airwire pretends to be DCC, but its not, as the commands are sent via radio to the decoder, not through the track.

Steve can you show me where Airwire pretends to be DCC? All Airwire drop-ins come with a built in fuse

Richard, early in its development, Airwire liked to compare itself to DCC, and I think its Tx can be used for DCC. I’ll let you do the historical research. They have since abandoned that marketing approach.

I had forgotten about that fuse, thanks. what happens if it blow? How hard is it to replace? After opening, that is.

Steve I could not find anywhere that Airwire pretends to be DCC that is why i asked you. The fuse is a auto push in fuse, easy to change i change the ones i have to 10amp they come with a 20 or 15 amp in them. The fuse is the standard size auto push in blade I thank 10 amp is blue. you can get them a wallmart or any auto parts store.

Go with the polySwitch as it is self resetting, no need to change it.

Richard, since you asked, from their web page www.cvpusa.com/airwire_system.php Since the G2 has a full 3 amp DCC output, any DCC compatible decoder can be controlled directly from the throttle.

We both agree that Airwire is not DCC, yet they persist.

Thanks for the info on the polyswitches.

Whether Airwire is “DCC” depends on how narrowly you want to define DCC. If you take the traditional approach that the term “DCC” only applies to the throttle>command station>track>multiple decoder distribution model, then under that model, Airwire is not “DCC.” Neither is using the Airwire or G-wire transmitter with with a G-wire/QSI decoder. Airwire (and manufacturers of similar wireless systems) use a broader definition; one that applies “DCC” to the command protocol (encoding and data packets), divorcing it from any specific means of distribution.

More and more, these “non-traditional” DCC systems are becoming popular in the smaller scales as well as large scale. Northwest ShortLine sells their “Stanton S-Cab” system which uses a dedicated handheld transmitter to control generic DCC decoders via an onboard receiver wired directly to the decoder. (This is similar to the G-wire/QSI pairing.) Airwire’s “G3” and drop-in decoders are nothing more than a wireless receiver connected to a motor/function decoder no different than the G-wire/QSI or the S-Cab pairings.

Airwire and Tam Valley Depot sell receivers which control any generic DCC decoder just by hooking the output of the receiver to the track input of the decoder. With the Tam Valley Depot “Dead Rail System,” you can control the decoder either via an Airwire transmitter or by clipping their transmitter module to the rails of any “traditional” DCC-powered railroad. That allows you to use whatever command station you already have or might want to use, but not need the rails to get the command signals to the decoders. Airwire’s “Convertr” wireless receiver uses any Airwire handheld transmitter to control the decoders. Massoth has had a similar wireless receiver on their web site for a few years now, but it has yet to come to fruition.

The times, they are a changin’. The lines that used to exist between various control methods are disappearing as technology evolves and systems overlap more and more. The core command protocol is unchanged, so compatibility across manufacturers is maintained. That–to me–is a good thing. I used to be limited to various proprietary systems, but now I can use the transmitters I already own and control pretty much any DCC decoder on the market with them. Likewise, for those already invested in DCC, you can use your existing DCC command system and now broadcast the control packets to your decoders without even needing wires to the track. Good times!

In regard to your inquiry, I offered my thoughts on your similar thread a few days ago–just hook the motors of “Unit 2” to the motor output of the Airwire in “Unit 1.” Like others stated above, I also use fuses between the battery and control electronics. Cheap insurance. I usually use 5-amp fuses, but I’m not running 4 motors from one battery. Presuming these units haven’t been converted yet, can you run them and measure their current draw under regular track power at various voltages? That will give you some idea of what your needs would be. Another option would be to put fuses between the battery and electronics (10 amps) then 5-amp fuses between the electronics and motors of both units. That’s a definite “belt and suspenders” approach, but at 99 cents per fuse, it’s still cheap insurance even at three times the cost.

Later,

K

Now, Kevin, you’re just trying to confuse me with facts. (http://www.largescalecentral.com/externals/tinymce/plugins/emoticons/img/smiley-laughing.gif)

A “packet” is a small sailing vessel, usually a brig, or a sloop. Do you have those delivering messages to your locomotives?

According to you, I’m using DCC now, just like Greg! How 'bout that! And I don’t have to worry 'bout dirty track!

Actually, the definition of DCC involves getting the signals through the rails, so AirWire is NOT DCC by that definition.

But the DCC commands and protocol can be sent on any media, rails, or over the air, and if you CAN send it over the air, and then you have a gadget that feeds it into the “track inputs” of a DCC decoder, then, heck, it’s pretty much DCC in my opinion.

But when you go through a G2 or G3, that decoder will not pass all the DCC commands it “hears” and not all DCC commands are sent over the air transparently.

Enough works to pretty much still call it DCC.

On fuses: If you can get to them easily, and you don’t mind the cost and space they take up, by all means put in fuses.

On battery power, no issue. On track power, you need to separate the pickups for at least the front and rear trucks on dismals, and side to side, that’s 4 minimum, so there I use the PolySwitches. The ones Aristo has used successfully are not super fast “blow”, they should “hold” 3 amps and blow pretty quickly on 6. Since how they work is that they melt into a liquid under high current (inside) and then re-crystallize when cooling, they are not as fast as a “fast blow” fuse, but in most cases fast enough, and self resetting is a big advantage.

Greg

Greg, you’ve raised that point in the past, but I’ve never seen such a narrow definition of DCC written by anyone who isn’t writing specifically for a track-powered audience. Can you point me to a definition of DCC which mandates power be transmitted through the rails that comes from the NMRA or similar organization? The best I’ve come up with from the NMRA comes from NMRA S-9.1.2, where they define “Digital Command Control” simply as a “Method of controlling multiple trains and accessories using digital communications packets to send commands.

You and I seem to agree that the DCC protocol can be sent via a variety of means. The NMRA’s standards do not mandate track power, though they are written from within that context. Since wireless DCC is an emerging technology, it doesn’t at all surprise me that the NMRA’s standards don’t make mention specifically of issues particular to non-traditional implementations of the DCC protocol. I have my doubts that we will anytime soon. So long as the output of the receiver is compliant, that’s all the standards care about.

Later,

K

This is all very interesting, I’m sure, but it doesn’t get my slave GP9 hooked up, does it? I’ll be using Paul Norton ideas on the GP mu from the OVGRS web write for the slave. Now, I need to know where to pick up power from the Airwire board.

Any ideas?

Steve

I don’t think that you have many options, use a connector like the original power connector. One for the front motor and one for the rear motor. that’s 4 wires going to the slave. I don’t know if i would put a fuse or a lollipop in line here or rely on the built-in one. If the add on pops your going to put a big drag on the rest.